Characterization of circulating DNA in plasma of patients after allogeneic bone grafting

Abstract

Objectives Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) harboring mutations has been found in patients with diseases. Experimental studies have shown that cfDNA can be transmitted, leading to transformations in the host. In the present study, we evaluated whether bone allograft material contains cfDNA and whether this foreign cfDNA can be released into the patient's blood circulation. Materials and methods Plasma samples were collected preoperatively and postoperatively on the same day, at 5 weeks, and 4 months from 25 women who received bone allograft material (test group) from male donors and from 10 women who were treated with autologous graft (control group, only per-and postoperative samples were collected). DNA was quantified and characterized in bone material and plasma samples by quantitative PCR with primers specific for glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) and Y chromosome and gel electrophoresis. DNA in bone material was digested by different concentrations of DNase I. Results We detected between 1 and 1.8 μg cfDNA fragments at a length around 601 base pairs (bp) and smaller in each 100 mg allograft. Treatment of the allograft with DNase I completely degraded the longer but not the shorter DNA 90-bp fragments. Y-DNA was not detected in the patients' bloodstream at any time during the treatment and follow-up, but elevated levels of circulating cfDNA could be measured immediately postoperatively. Conclusions Our results suggest that a transmission of DNA from allografts used for alveolar ridge reconstruction in humans is unlikely. The observed increase in circulating cfDNA in allograft and autograft patients immediately postoperatively may be elicited by the surgical procedure. Clinical relevance The results support the safety of allograft materials. The results suggest that human allograft materials seem not to release DNA into the blood since we did not measure Y-DNA with our technique.

A 3-year prospective randomized clinical trial of alveolar bone crest response and clinical parameters through 1, 2, and 3 years of clinical function of implants placed 4 months after alveolar ridge preservation using two different allogeneic bone-grafting materials

“…Sample size per group did not need to be increased to control for attrition bias. The sample size was calculated using G power software and derived from our previous study [ 44 ]. Therefore, a sample size of 18 patients in each treatment group was considered to be sufficient to meet the primary objective of this study.…”

Survival Rates of Dental Implants in Autogenous and Allogeneic Bone Blocks: A Systematic Review

“…Reason for Exclusion Aghazadeh et al, 2012 [140] Application of granular autograft Arenaz-Búa et al, 2010 [141] Application of granular autograft Barboza et al, 2010 [142] Application of allogeneic bone granules Beitlitum et al, 2018 [143] Application of allogeneic bone granules Bianconi et al, 2017 [144] Alveolar ridge preservation Charde et al, 2020 [145] Block used for peri-implant bone regeneration Naishlos et al, 2021 [146] Blocks used for sinus floor augmentation Corinaldesi et al, 2009 [147] Application of autogenous bone granules El Chaar et al, 2019 [148] Application of allogeneic bone granules Ge et al, 2017 [149] Application of granular autograft Güven and Tekin, 2006 [150] Wrong indication (cyst filling) Huang et al, 2016 [151] Application of allogeneic bone granules Ilankovan et al, 1998 [152] No outcome of interest reported Jacotti et al, 2012 [153] Sample size too small Kang et al, 2015 [154] Particulated iliac bone applied with sinus lift Khoury and Hanser, 2015 [155] No outcome of interest reported Krasny et al, 2018 [156] Inclusion of patients with follow-up of less than 12 months Lekholm et al, 1999 [157] Application of different surgical approaches, missing patient information [160] Application of granular materials Merli et al, 2020 [161] Application of granular grafting materials Morad and Khojasteh, 2013 [162] Sample size too small Mordenfeld et al, 2017 [163] Application of granular autograft Özkan et al, 2007 [164] Sample size too small Pimentel et al, 2014 [165] Sample size too small Putters et al, 2018 [166] No outcome of interest reported Quereshy et al, 2010 [167] Sample size too small Sethi et al, 2020 [168] Inclusion of patients with follow-up < 12 months Simion et al, 2001 [169] Application of granular materials Simon et al, 2000 [170] Surgical technique (ARP) Soehardi et al, 2009 [171] No differentiation between onlay block and sinus floor elevation Solakoglu et al, 2019 …”

Construction of hollow polydopamine nanoparticle based drug sustainable release system and its application in bone regeneration

“… 44 Allogeneic bone transplantation is faced with the limitation of donor sources and immune rejection. 45 Autologous bone transplantation is faced with self-damage. 46 Therefore, the use of osteogenic drugs is ideal to induce bone tissue regeneration.…”